000			01579cam a2200229 4500
001			ABS64530
008			010924n2001 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u114796
245		4	_aThe jurisdiction of arbitrators
260			_c2001
490			_aArbitration Law Monthly _v1(6) August 2001, 1-5(5)
520			_aDiscusses CA's ruling in "LG Caltex Gas Co Ltd and Contigroup Inc v China National Petroleum and China Petroleum Technology & Development Corporation". CA reversed Aikens J's earlier decision that the parties had entered into an ad hoc agreement to give the arbitrator jurisdiction to decide whether there was a binding contract of sale between them, and that this agreement therefore precluded any challenge to the arbitrator's ultimate award that there was no sale agreement between them. CA found that, under Arbitration Act 1996 s67, Caltex was allowed to challenge the ruling of the arbitrator that he had no jurisdiction. Discusses what must be derived from this decision regarding the approach parties should take where a jurisdictional problem arises before the arbitrator (Partly taken from journal headnote).
590			_aABS
650			_aJURISDICTION
650			_aAD HOC AGREEMENTS
650			_aLG CALTEX GAS LTD AND CONTIGROUP INC V CHINA NATIONAL PETROLEUM AND CHINA PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
650			_aARBITRATION ACT 1996 S67
650			_aCONTRACT OF SALE
650			_aARBITRATORS
690			_aMANGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION
942			_n0
999			_c68342 _d68342